Not necessarily. A .357 magnum kicks like a mule, despite being a smaller caliber than a Colt .45, for instance. The recoil is based partly on the recoil system, and partly on how much of a powder charge is used.

3. It's black powder. While I put a large amount of powder into it, the combustion isn't as fast as modern gunpowder so it doesn't have as much force behind it when you shoot it.

Eh? It is my understanding that, given two guns of the same weight, firing the same mass of bullet at the same velocity, the black powder arm will tend to recoil more because you are lighting off more propellant to do the same job.

I have both an Uberti replica Colt 1873 single-action revolver in .45 Colt (the "long" Colt); and an original (manufactured in 1889) Colt 1878 Double Action, both with a 5.5" barrel. A case full of black powder (about 35-37 grains in a modern case) will drive a 255 grain bullet to 950 ft/sec. The same feat can be achieved in smokeless using just 8 grains of Unique. The smokeless load out of the Uberti is warm, but pleasant load. The full-power black powder load out of the Colt kicks about as hard as a .41 Magnum.

Also, you barely feel firing smokeless .45/70 loads (405 grain bullet at 1200 ft/sec) out of a Springfield 1873 rifle. The same thing cannot be said for using ~65 grains of black powder to do the same job.

Sea Skimmer wrote:My Mosin is a 1943 Izzy, so is my friend's, but his aged a lot better. Both all matching parts.

Word. I have a 1936 Izzy. Man, if it could talk!

"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."

Not necessarily. A .357 magnum kicks like a mule, despite being a smaller caliber than a Colt .45, for instance. The recoil is based partly on the recoil system, and partly on how much of a powder charge is used.

3. It's black powder. While I put a large amount of powder into it, the combustion isn't as fast as modern gunpowder so it doesn't have as much force behind it when you shoot it.

Eh? It is my understanding that, given two guns of the same weight, firing the same mass of bullet at the same velocity, the black powder arm will tend to recoil more because you are lighting off more propellant to do the same job.

I have both an Uberti replica Colt 1873 single-action revolver in .45 Colt (the "long" Colt); and an original (manufactured in 1889) Colt 1878 Double Action, both with a 5.5" barrel. A case full of black powder (about 35-37 grains in a modern case) will drive a 255 grain bullet to 950 ft/sec. The same feat can be achieved in smokeless using just 8 grains of Unique. The smokeless load out of the Uberti is warm, but pleasant load. The full-power black powder load out of the Colt kicks about as hard as a .41 Magnum.

Also, you barely feel firing smokeless .45/70 loads (405 grain bullet at 1200 ft/sec) out of a Springfield 1873 rifle. The same thing cannot be said for using ~65 grains of black powder to do the same job.

I dunno, I've always felt my muzzleloaders kick far less than a modern rifle or handgun. Maybe it's just me.

Out of the two, the gun that propels the projectile to a higher velocity will have more recoil based on simpe physics. If the loads are matched so that the muzzle velocity is equal then some other factor must come into play, I suppose a greater volume of gas could have something of a rocket effect that would give BP a somewhat higher recoil?

As for burn speeds, there are smokeless powders with varying burn rates, they also affect how recoil feels, also how big a charge you can use. For instance when loading my .44 magnum loads I use Vihtavuori N110, a slow burning pistol powder. The slower burn allows you to fill the case up more (most loads have a little compression even) and achieve a higher velocity without raising pressure too much. Pack the .44 case full of a slower powder like say N320 and you just built yourself your own hand grenade.

Black powder burns very fast as well compared to most smokeless powders, yet it's safer than smokeless, you can't really blow up a modern gun even if you fill it and pack it down with BP, I admit this has puzzled me a lot, how it can be faster burning yet you won't have the same issues as stated above, given how much faster it is than smokeless.

I wonder if the reason is that BP cannot detonate is that it deflagrates and it does this by reacting with oxygen and the harder you pack it the more you reduce it's surface area, and the amount of oxygen is limited as well (what fits inside the case), so BP will always expand at more or less the same speed, maybe even slower if you pack it too hard and reduce the surface area too much by squeezing out the air.

Smokeless powders can detonate however when put in the right circumstances and they don't need oxygen when they detonate, it's a different animal alltogether then.

Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.

the big .57 ball may be heavier than modern ammo but the muzzle velocity is also a 1/3rd that of today's rifles, so less overall energy. the slower burning powder will lessen the 'felt' recoil by spreading the kick out over a longer time. they also tend to be a lot heavier than anything modern, which also reduces recoil.

If a black-hawk flies over a light show and is not harmed, does that make it immune to lasers?

To lonestar:
Might be a bit far out of your way, seeing as its in Waldorf, though not that far from the Dalgren bridge on the MD side, but have you looked up Myrtle Grove?

HDS:
I'd expect the mass of gas to be part of it for recoil--after all, gas has momentum too, and some decent velocity getting out the barrel. In terms of the pressure, I dunno, first thought would be burn temperature, lowering how much the gas wants to expand.

His Divine Shadow wrote:Out of the two, the gun that propels the projectile to a higher velocity will have more recoil based on simpe physics. If the loads are matched so that the muzzle velocity is equal then some other factor must come into play, I suppose a greater volume of gas could have something of a rocket effect that would give BP a somewhat higher recoil?

As for burn speeds, there are smokeless powders with varying burn rates, they also affect how recoil feels, also how big a charge you can use. For instance when loading my .44 magnum loads I use Vihtavuori N110, a slow burning pistol powder. The slower burn allows you to fill the case up more (most loads have a little compression even) and achieve a higher velocity without raising pressure too much. Pack the .44 case full of a slower powder like say N320 and you just built yourself your own hand grenade.

Black powder burns very fast as well compared to most smokeless powders, yet it's safer than smokeless, you can't really blow up a modern gun even if you fill it and pack it down with BP, I admit this has puzzled me a lot, how it can be faster burning yet you won't have the same issues as stated above, given how much faster it is than smokeless.

Black powder isn't faster than all smokeless powders. It is faster than quite a few smokeless rifle powders, but it's a good deal slower than virtually all smokeless pistol powders. (BTW, according to the burn rate charts I have, VV N320 is much faster than VV N110 ... which is why it's dangerous to use large charges of N320 in a magnum pistol cartridge; because it all tends to go up at once, leading to gun-scattering pressure spike.)

And if you go by detonation velocities, black powder has a detonation velocity of some 400 m/s. The detonation velocities of the explosive components of smokeless powder all handily exceed 6000 m/s. Smokeless powders are typically safer than black powder because they're not nearly as apt to go up at the slightest provocation.

I wonder if the reason is that BP cannot detonate is that it deflagrates and it does this by reacting with oxygen and the harder you pack it the more you reduce it's surface area, and the amount of oxygen is limited as well (what fits inside the case), so BP will always expand at more or less the same speed, maybe even slower if you pack it too hard and reduce the surface area too much by squeezing out the air.

Smokeless powders can detonate however when put in the right circumstances and they don't need oxygen when they detonate, it's a different animal alltogether then.

Black powder carries all the oxidizer it needs in the form of the nitrates in it. You can shoot a black powder gun in space just like you can any other gun. It's just that smokeless powder has that high detonation velocity, so if you pack it in too tightly, the burn rate stops being controlled by things like powder flake size and shape, and starts being controlled by how fast the detonation front progresses through the mass of explosive.

What really limits black powder is the fact that only 45% of a given charge of black powder goes into gas generation. Over half of it is left behind as solid particulates.

So since black powder isn't the fastest, or the most efficient, propellant out there; you need to use huge quantities of it to generate the same pressures (and muzzle velocities) that you can with smaller charges of fast-burning, efficient, smokeless.

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote:Black powder isn't faster than all smokeless powders. It is faster than quite a few smokeless rifle powders, but it's a good deal slower than virtually all smokeless pistol powders. (BTW, according to the burn rate charts I have, VV N320 is much faster than VV N110 ... which is why it's dangerous to use large charges of N320 in a magnum pistol cartridge; because it all tends to go up at once, leading to gun-scattering pressure spike.)

That was a typo, meant to say faster. Writing in a hurry last night. I didn't really know how fast BP is against most pistol powders though, there are no charts that I've found, I've only done tests myself by laying them out in a line, but only with N110 and N135 vs BP, BP was near instantaneous while the smokeless looked like it does in the movies when they pour out a line on the floor.

And if you go by detonation velocities, black powder has a detonation velocity of some 400 m/s. The detonation velocities of the explosive components of smokeless powder all handily exceed 6000 m/s. Smokeless powders are typically safer than black powder because they're not nearly as apt to go up at the slightest provocation.

This is I believe the heart of what I was getting at, BP is limited in this way and it cann't truly detonate like smokeless can. As for safety that would in regards to manufacture/storage/handling then.

Black powder carries all the oxidizer it needs in the form of the nitrates in it. You can shoot a black powder gun in space just like you can any other gun. It's just that smokeless powder has that high detonation velocity, so if you pack it in too tightly, the burn rate stops being controlled by things like powder flake size and shape, and starts being controlled by how fast the detonation front progresses through the mass of explosive.

Oh yeah thats right, I dunno why I mixed in oxygen in this, probably because it said oxidizer and I was halfway out the door as I was typing.

Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who did not.

Vejut wrote:To lonestar:
Might be a bit far out of your way, seeing as its in Waldorf, though not that far from the Dalgren bridge on the MD side, but have you looked up Myrtle Grove?

.

Probably the only gun I could really shoot there would be my Nugget and rimfires(and Garand. And M1 Carbine). I would like to be able to shoot my AK-74, which are now banned from the Great State of Maryland. Point of a outdoor range would be to be able to shoot my surplus ammo.

"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."

I'd have to check on that. The law only banned the transfer of AKs and the like in MD, as far as I know, and likewise, you can't buy 11+rd magazines here, but you can use them if you own them, burden of proof being on the police to show they're not legal. Not sure how that'd work with cross-border visits though.

Edit: Checked the statute. Yeah, you're right, so we get the odd condition were I'm perfectly allowed to go shoot my AK at Myrtle grove, but you wouldn't be.

I suspect it would be very senile while attempting to ask for vokda and cigarettes.

"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956

Vejut wrote:I'd have to check on that. The law only banned the transfer of AKs and the like in MD, as far as I know, and likewise, you can't buy 11+rd magazines here, but you can use them if you own them, burden of proof being on the police to show they're not legal. Not sure how that'd work with cross-border visits though.

Edit: Checked the statute. Yeah, you're right, so we get the odd condition were I'm perfectly allowed to go shoot my AK at Myrtle grove, but you wouldn't be.

Yeah, coworker recommended against going to Myrtle Grove. His exact words were "It's very Ghetto and the ROs are absent even when they're there."

"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."

I haven't gone for probably 10 years, and the family mostly went to the shotgun side. It wasn't anything fancy, but I don't recall it being that bad. I don't recall much about the RO either way--cease fires and that were called, but for the usual "go put up your targets" sort of thing, no emergencies or anything. Moot anyways, since the banned assualt rifles fall under the old assualt pistol scheme, not the friendlier one they were on so you can't use it the way it'd be helpful to.

-Magazines and also other accessories are to become “essential components of a firearm” and thus require a licence to purchase them

-Magazines are to be restricted in capacity (without concrete details)

-Quantities of ammunition (purchase/possession/storage) are to be regulated

-Trade on the Internet for guns and ammunition is to be restricted or prohibited

-Ornamental/ceremonial should be banned entirely when possible

-Soft air and compressed air guns should be more strictly regulated

-In the long term, all legally registered guns are to be secured biometrically

-Central storage is preferred to storage in private homes

"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."

I don't get the ban on ornamental or ceremonial weapons. As for the rest, it seems to be mainly extensions of already existing stuff.

I don't see why requiring a license for buying ammunition is so bad.

Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------My LPs

Really? I mean in a similar vein to Thanas' thread on swords, guns can very much be works of art and pieces of history. If someone told me that I wasn't allowed to own a non-firing version of an old-fashioned blunderbuss, or a Coronado-era matchlock, I'd tell them to go fuck themselves.

I'm worried about the compressed air/sot air guns. I like my air rifles. I like them a whole lot. I some EU bureaucrat wants to restrict them, he can go fuck himself.

Baltar: "I don't want to miss a moment of the last Battlestar's destruction!"
Centurion: "Sir, I really think you should look at the other Battlestar."
Baltar: "What are you babbling about other...it's impossible!"
Centurion: "No. It is a Battlestar."

Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.

I shall note that none of this has passed and is little more than suggestions at this point. The focus is on illegal weapons usage and ways to combat it. I don't think any of this dealing with non-functional weapons will pass.

For example, I am still able to purchase sharp rapiers with which I could easily skewer a dozen people. Not guns, no, but more dangerous than a non-functional AK? You bet.

Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------My LPs

Hey look what santa left a couple days late! Totally not an SVT-40 made in 1941!

Sighted to only 1,500 meters, and I'm not sure I want to know why it has two full inches of muzzle break flash hider sort of thingy on the end. Signfingantly lighter and slightly shorter overall then my M91/30, action feels awesome. Also it has holes filled in that clearly indicate it was once a sniper rifle, so I'm just going to safely assume it has 1200 confirmed Japanazi kills.

"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956

"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."

Santa gifted it from existing stock so to speak, so the original cost was probably under 200 dollars worth of elven slave labor vouchers a long time ago and thus chicken scratch compared to present day prices.

On a comical note, the bayonets are now going for 400 dollars. I didn't get one with it as Santa never had one and much regrets it.

"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956

The flash hider seems to go well with the sniper rilfe, so I am going to assume I am just failing reading comprehension again.

But really cool gun.

Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------My LPs

It wasn't designed as sniper rifle, and the thing is just excessive, oversized flash hiders can end up kicking up dust around the firers position thus defeating any point of concealment. They also throw off accuracy slightly, both when firing and by affecting the straightness of the barrel when attached. Generally you don't want one on a sniper rifle because of that; if you need a muzzle break for a high caliber rifle meanwhile, well then so be it. This thing meanwhile, its three times the size of reasonable and each slit was a serious machining job.

The whole SVT-38/40 was overengineered, as the thirty something steps it appears I need to do to take it apart to clean indicate, which is a big reason why Russia simply stopped making them in the middle of WW2. Maybe its no surprise then that the Nazi's loved it and copied certain aspects for the Gewehr 43!

I sure do like the adjustable gas regulator though, so you can tune your gun for how optimally shitty your ammunition is. Hopefully it's already set well enough, because I don't have the tool to turn it at the moment and its not easily improvised. I should probably seek one out before going to the range least it jam on every shot.

"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956